Seite 168 - The Great Controversy (1911)

Das ist die SEO-Version von The Great Controversy (1911). Klicken Sie hier, um volle Version zu sehen

« Vorherige Seite Inhalt Nächste Seite »
164
The Great Controversy
the sweepings of the world; but Christ will look down on His poor
people, and will preserve them.”—Ibid., b. 13, ch. 5. The evangeli-
cal princes in attendance at the Diet were forbidden even to have the
gospel preached in their dwellings. But the people of Spires thirsted
for the word of God, and, notwithstanding the prohibition, thousands
flocked to the services held in the chapel of the elector of Saxony.
This hastened the crisis. An imperial message announced to the
Diet that as the resolution granting liberty of conscience had given
rise to great disorders, the emperor required that it be annulled. This
arbitrary act excited the indignation and alarm of the evangelical Chris-
tians. Said one: “Christ has again fallen into the hands of Caiaphas
and Pilate.” The Romanists became more violent. A bigoted papist
declared: “The Turks are better than the Lutherans; for the Turks
observe fast days, and the Lutherans violate them. If we must choose
between the Holy Scriptures of God and the old errors of the church,
we should reject the former.” Said Melanchthon: “Every day, in full
assembly, Faber casts some new stone at us gospelers.”—Ibid., b. 13,
ch. 5.
Religious toleration had been legally established, and the evangel-
ical states were resolved to oppose the infringement of their rights.
Luther, being still under the ban imposed by the Edict of Worms, was
not permitted to be present at Spires; but his place was supplied by
his colaborers and the princes whom God had raised up to defend His
cause in this emergency. The noble Frederick of Saxony, Luther’s for-
[199]
mer protector, had been removed by death; but Duke John, his brother
and successor, had joyfully welcomed the Reformation, and while a
friend of peace, he displayed great energy and courage in all matters
relating to the interests of the faith.
The priests demanded that the states which had accepted the Ref-
ormation submit implicitly to Romish jurisdiction. The Reformers, on
the other hand, claimed the liberty which had previously been granted.
They could not consent that Rome should again bring under her control
those states that had with so great joy received the word of God.
As a compromise it was finally proposed that where the Reforma-
tion had not become established, the Edict of Worms should be rigor-
ously enforced; and that “in those where the people had deviated from
it, and where they could not conform to it without danger of revolt, they
should at least effect no new reform, they should touch upon no contro-